1190
Comments (115)
sorted by:
22
jtt888 22 points ago +22 / -0

The whole notion of 6 feet is arbitrary. Why not 7 feet? Or 10 feet? There's so many factors that go into what might be called "an exposure to covid". Room size, ventilation, number of people, time in the room. It's all been a false sense of security for the fearful. If someone is afraid of infectious diseases, they can stay in their house with no visitors and be totally safe. For the rest of us, leave us the fuck alone to make our own decisions.

6
Freeandbrown 6 points ago +6 / -0

I actually had found some older papers (early 2000s) on respiratory droplets. Essentially, 5ft was the sweet spot. Larger water particles would fall to the ground via gravity, and smaller would evaporate before hitting that threshold. Obviously this is assuming the virus immediately dies after the water is gone (it doesn't). So it's a moot point.

The moment you are indoors with someone, you have relented all protection. Masks don't matter. If you're 5 ft away, take that mask off. Since pure virus goes through and around (since no emphasis on fit or actual filtration), all you're really worried about is someone sneezing or coughing in your direction while your mouth is open. Lol.

All these people that think you can be safe indoors as long as you have a mask... #eyeroll. At that point, just enjoy being alive and let your immune system do some work!

18
Celtic_Warrior 18 points ago +18 / -0

The “social distancing” thing is really anti-social and at this point it looks like more of a psychological operation against the non-thinking public. The goal is seemingly to keep people isolated and away from each other and to hide their expressions behind a mask. It’s horrible in so many ways.

The elites in government have taken away so many freedoms and they’ve successfully trained the general public to be obedient if they want to have even a little bit of freedom back.

The average NPC believes now that less obedience means less freedom and that we need to obey more to get more freedom back. They keep their masks on and they continue to comply with every ridiculous dehumanizing mandate.

11
racer513 11 points ago +11 / -0

The 6' rule came from a 14 yo girls science project in HS. Muh science is settled!

3
residue69 3 points ago +3 / -0

Kinda like the straw ban!

Turns out the kid's father works for a plastic recycling lobbying group that wanted a more profitable waste stream from restaurants. Straws aren't made from recyclable plastic, but the new sippy cup lids are, and they're made from the same plastic as the clear cups. Now there's more total plastic in each serving.

10
invalid_data 10 points ago +10 / -0

Their conclusions are common sense. 6ft rule means nothing and really maybe only helps with large droplet transmission, ie. somebody coughing on you. But in reality it does nothing for overall airborne transmission. They concluded the very obvious deduction, the more people in an indoor room, the more risk of spreading an infection. Well no duh. But this is where our immune systems come into play. Hooray. People have been going to large tight gathers for millenniums, lets cut with this virtue signaling health BS.

4
Keiichi81 4 points ago +4 / -0

So we now know - officially from reputable studies - that:

-masks are totally ineffective
-obsessively disinfecting surfaces is largely for show
-social distancing has no real benefit

Explain why life can't resume as normal if we're supposed to "tRuSt tHe sCiEnCe".

3
Vailyon 3 points ago +3 / -0

No shit

3
Gmelindag 3 points ago +3 / -0

He has been all bullshit from the get-go the way to steal a country! America!

1
bidenrapeskids 1 point ago +1 / -0

The research study is basically saying that more space is required a d more strict efforts are needed to reduce transmission.

Not exactly sound logic

1
Space_Force 1 point ago +1 / -0

Oh course, because it's ALL BULLSHIT!

1
Grover 1 point ago +1 / -0

Just came from the gun show in Anderson, SC. Social distancing??? HA HA HA HA!

1
peltast 1 point ago +1 / -0

Watch Fauci start a 9 ft. rule. And, everybody will rejoice!

-29
Fignugent -29 points ago +2 / -31

there absolutely is a benefit

you have to be wearing a mask AND be 6ft away

the benefit is called "reduced viral load" and it's the reason we have so many asymptomatic carriers

18
stealthboy 18 points ago +18 / -0

Asymptomatic spread is not a thing.

-25
Fignugent -25 points ago +1 / -26

it certainly is

sneezing and coughing can happen regardless of whether you have covid or not

those are "symptoms"

9
stealthboy 9 points ago +9 / -0

Asymptomatic spread is not a thing.

9
Chaylar 9 points ago +10 / -1

Idiot.

12
literallyhitler 12 points ago +12 / -0

"the risk of being exposed to Covid-19 indoors is as great at 60 feet as it is at 6 feet — even when wearing a mask."

your viral load theory doesn't make sense when one could theorize asymptomatic or even pre-symptomatic ppl are actually increasing their own viral load by concentrating the viral shedding in their mask.

funny, that.

-8
Fignugent -8 points ago +2 / -10

"being exposed" to a minimal viral load from masked aerosol at 60 ft is not the same as being sneezed full on maskless right into your fucking eyeballs at 6 ft

8
literallyhitler 8 points ago +8 / -0

people who sneeze in public cover their face w/ their fucking arm. no one has ever sneezed in my 'eyeballs' in public.

As I said, concentrating your own viral load is helpful how??? and what about the fact everyone is constantly touching and manhandling their masks all day, then using the same keypad, door handle, etc. Waiters touching their mask then bringing you your plates, drinks, etc. People stocking food at grocery stores and touching their disgusting masks. Remember the whole 'don't touch your face' thing?

The masks are a complete dystopian joke.

also the aerosols accumulate indoors. you're not just exposed to a 'masked aerosol' in passing.

-7
Fignugent -7 points ago +2 / -9

concentrating your own viral load is helpful how???

the fuck are you even talking about...

3
literallyhitler 3 points ago +3 / -0

what do you think happens when you are a/pre-symptomatic and are breathing/talking/coughing into a mask? you don't think constant exposure to your own shedding virus via a mask on your nose and mouth increases ones viral load?

-6
Fignugent -6 points ago +1 / -7

k you're a retard

you're not "getting sicker" from your own sickness

6
literallyhitler 6 points ago +6 / -0

We're not talking about 'sickness' we're talking about exposure to viral particles.

Someone is asymptomatic because they have a 'low viral load', according to you, yet are still shedding the virus. That virus is now accumulating into something they wear over their nose and mouth rather than being dispersed into their surrounding environment. You don't think that increases their viral load?

You don't make any sense.

7
InarosPrime 7 points ago +7 / -0

Masks don't work. There is no significant statistical difference between population groups who wear masks and those who don't.

-12
Fignugent -12 points ago +1 / -13

not lab tests, therefore meaningless

6
literallyhitler 6 points ago +6 / -0

a mask 'blocking particles' in a lab setting is meaningless

-9
Fignugent -9 points ago +1 / -10

it's the only metric that matters

9
InarosPrime 9 points ago +9 / -0

Having an impact on the real world is the only metric that matters.

-9
Fignugent -9 points ago +1 / -10

nope. real world has OTHER VARIABLES

which is why lab tests are done IN THE FIRST PLACE

stop being a retard

5
literallyhitler 5 points ago +5 / -0

Thus any mask, no matter how efficient at filtration or how good the seal, will have minimal effect if it is not used in conjunction with other preventative measures, such as isolation of infected cases, immunization, good respiratory etiquette, and regular hand hygiene.

from your own link, genius.

5
OldGreg 5 points ago +5 / -0

Hey, I pointed this out and got argued with, too.

-3
Fignugent -3 points ago +1 / -4

retard

-8
Fignugent -8 points ago +1 / -9

minimal effect is not quantified

this is someone's OPINION

stop being retarded

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
5
trumpple 5 points ago +5 / -0

Mask pressurizes the air out of the top of your mask making it worse

-10
Fignugent -10 points ago +1 / -11

nope, that's not a thing

7
-9
5
OldGreg 5 points ago +5 / -0

“They do not work,” vs “better than nothing.” They even admit in your older study that they don’t have any significant effect. You’re funny.

-4
Fignugent -4 points ago +1 / -5

if i edit then you'll see it

there will be a little hand symbol next to the comment

ie: learn how to internet

retard

2
OldGreg 2 points ago +2 / -0

😂😂😂

Point: proven. You can’t let anyone else have the last word, right or wrong. GOD I hate morons, especially leftist morons. You’re so easy to trigger it’s pathetic.

Who else besides a leftist sounds like a stick pig? u/Fignugent.

😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤷🏻‍♂️

-6
Fignugent -6 points ago +1 / -7

that's not what it says

don't make your own conclusions

6
OldGreg 6 points ago +6 / -0

It’s literally IN the conclusion of your source; that tells me you didn’t even bother to read it.

3
47urOFH3d 3 points ago +3 / -0

Volunteers wearing protective clothing (Tyvek suits) coughed twice into the box, and the air inside was sampled for 5 minutes.

I e, if a mask deflects the air you cough out, it will reduce the counts of agar growths just as if the air had been filtered clean.

-3
Fignugent -3 points ago +1 / -4

as intended

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
3
CuomoisaMassMurderer 3 points ago +4 / -1

Total bs.

-8
Fignugent -8 points ago +1 / -9

good argument

6
CuomoisaMassMurderer 6 points ago +6 / -0

It absolutely is. If you don't have symptoms, your viral load isn't enough to matter.

Unless you got the jab, that messes up everything.

-12
9
CuomoisaMassMurderer 9 points ago +9 / -0
  1. This relied on PCR testing, which is 100% bullshit.

  2. No control was given to determine when the viral load increased relative to the development of symptoms.

You 100% represent the mentality of everyone promoting panic, which is to say you demonstrate the IQ of a lemming and are too stupid to live.

-12
Fignugent -12 points ago +1 / -13
  1. your opinion

  2. wasn't in the scope of the study because it doesn't matter

9
CuomoisaMassMurderer 9 points ago +9 / -0
  1. NOT my opinion. FACT, per the inventor of the method.

  2. The topic is asymptomatic spread. No way is it possible for the development of symptoms to not matter. The timing of the development of symptoms was excluded to falsify the findings, and you're stupid enough to ignore that.

Critical thinking has been excluded from your education. Catch up!

4
permissible_missile 4 points ago +5 / -1

You actually think having a control group is just a matter of "scope"?

That's adorable